Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sexuality and gender. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sexuality and gender|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sexuality and gender. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sexuality and gender/archive

Purge page cache

watch

In addition to AfDs, this page also tracks Categories for discussion, Templates for deletion, Miscellany for deletion, and Deletion review, but these discussions are not automatically expanded here. You will have to follow the links from here to the discussion pages. Instructions for adding these discussions to this page are provided in the comments when you press "edit".

For important information about categorization:

Articles for deletion

Wrong-body narrative

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wildly pov article down to its title with only four primary sources supporting it, not at all sufficient coverage for a wikipedia article Snokalok (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Transsexual#Causes, studies, and theories. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 23:54, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there's POV issues here, I'm not seeing them. I see an article that summarizes the perspectives of three academics and one memoirist on a valid topic in gender studies. No one's perspective seems to be given undue weight, nor presented as objectively correct. And even if that were the case, that would be an argument for cleanup, not for deletion. The sources already cited are enough to establish WP:GNG, and Google Scholar shows plenty more that are yet to be cited, e.g. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] just to take 5 from the first page of results. Keep. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 04:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Counterpoints on POV:

1. The term "narrative" as opposed to "theory", "hypothesis", "model", etc inherently carries the connotation of deception

2. We only see criticism listed.

These two things come together to form an article inherently opposed to the concept.

I agree however on your presentation of several more sources that GNG is probably satisfied, and believe now that the article must rather be upsourced (and have its name changed) Snokalok (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do reliable sources use terms other than "narrative"? Are there reliable sources (enough to constitute due weight) that take non-critical views? At a glance all of the top sources on Google Scholar seem pretty critical. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 18:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Tamzin Response forthcoming, I had to take a breather. The UK court ruling has emboldened every terf on the island to try pov rewriting articles on women and trans people to favor a GC view, and that’s been a lot. Anyway, reading over your sources now. Snokalok (talk) 11:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you're seeing this as a "GC view", I think you may need to step away from articles like this one for a bit, because that sounds like you're seeing ghosts. Most criticism of the wrong-body narrative comes from trans intellectuals, not TERFs. That's true both in general, and in the sources currently in the article; at least three out of the four authors are trans (not sure on Engdahl). -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:11, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nono not this one, just in general I've been tired. I recognize this article is not one of those, but my energy has been sapped elsewhere and that means I had no energy to work on this section. Snokalok (talk) 12:12, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Hansen (pornographic actor)

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It doesn't seem like this one meets WP:GNG. The references are not SIGCOV and most of them don't seem like reliable sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:58, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:05, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't look like the sources are significant coverage, and while I don't know if this recreated version is significantly different from the previously deleted version, it seems that the previous deletion nomination closed with the same finding and it is unlikely that much changed. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Following sources seem to be coverage significant enough, considering he has been featured in DNA magazine and made headlines in AVN and XBIZ:

Bright, Richard (2006-08-17). "Porn Star Q&A: Brian Hansen". AVN.
"Meet Brian Hansen". Fleshbot. 2006-04-25.
"COLT Launches Buckshot Man Brian Hansen's Fan Site". XBIZ. 2007-02-06
"BRIAN HANSEN The life and times and pajamas of porn's latest superstar". DNA. No. 81. January 2006.
"Brian Hansen's Grabby Snatch". DNA Magazine #90. July 2007. p. 10. Retrieved 2025-04-20 – via Scribd.
Rice, G. Zisk (2010-01-08). "Buckshot Man Brian Hansen Returns in 'Lotus'". AVN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkavirya (talk • contribs) 12:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A cleanup could be done of unreliable sources, instead of deleting the entire article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkavirya (talk • contribs) 13:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources are too efficient (AVN) to justify keeping the article Iban14mxl (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a source eval?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes SIGCOV Madeline1805 (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories, Templates, Redirects for deletion

none at this time

Miscellany for deletion

Proposed deletions

Deletion review